Trends of the use of pegylated granulopoiesis growth factors in clinical practice – single oncology centre experience since 2005

Czech version

Authors: S. Vokurka ^1,2; V. Kliment ¹; J. Kulhánková ¹; M. Votavová ¹; Z. Janková ¹; O. Šorejs ¹; O. Fiala ¹; J. Fínek ¹
Published in: Klin Onkol 2024; 38(Sborník abstrakt): 119-122
Category: Article
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/ccko2023S119

Overview

Background: Pegylated granulopoesis growth factors (pegylated granulocyte colony-stimulating factors – PGCSF), pegfilgrastim and lipegfilgrastim, have established indications in the prophylaxis of febrile neutropenia (FN) after chemotherapy (CHT). Almost two decades after their introduction into practice, there is an opportunity to analyze their use development.

Patients and methods: Retrospective and single centre analysis; patients with at least one and the first in their history application of PGCSF in 2005–2020 (N = 1,794); comparison of characteristics of the Historical group (2005–2010, N = 214) with the numerically comparable Recent group (2019, N = 222).

Results: In the period 2005–2020, there were 1 794 patients with at least one first application of PGCSF. Historical group vs. Recent: age 50 (18–77) vs. 58 (23–84) years; women 79 vs. 66%; breast and gastrointestinal cancer 67 and 3% vs. 29 and 25% respectively; primary FN prophylaxis 45 vs. 62%; CHT curative/neo-adjuvant 75 vs. 61%; CHT Q3W 94 vs. 53%; CHT Q2W 2 vs. 36%; CHT TAC/FEC/AC 57 vs. 25%; FOLFOX/FOLFIRI ± anti-VEGF/-EGFR 0.5 vs. 16% (all P < 0.05); FN incidence 4 vs. 0%; leukopenia as a separate reason leading to postponement of CHT despite prophylactic administration of PGCSF: 2.8 vs. 4.9%; musculoskeletal pain and arthralgia 9 vs. 5%; intolerance/allergy: 2 vs. 1 (all statistically n.s.).

Conclusion: In 2019, compared to 2005–2010, we show an increase in the use of PGCSF with a shift to palliative CHT protocols and generally less risky for the development of FN. The efficacy and safety of PGCSF were consistent with the conclusions of published studies. More detailed analyses of indications for Q2W protocols, generally low-risk or infrequent non-standard situations can bring other important insights and are topics for ideally multicenter cooperation.

Keywords:

prevention – side effects – Neutropenia – pegfilrastim – lipegfilgrastim

Sources

Aapro M, Bohlius J, Cameron DA et al. 2010 update of EORTC guidelines for the use of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to reduce the incidence of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia in adult patients with lymphoproliferative disorders and solid tumours. Eur J Cancer 2011; 47 (1): 8–32. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2010. 10.013.
Klastersky J, de Naurois J, Rolston K et al. Management of febrile neutropaenia: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines. Ann Oncol 2016; 27 (suppl 5): v111–v118.
Smith TJ, Bohlke K, Lyman GH et al. Recommendations for the use of WBC Growth Factors: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline Update. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33 (28): 3199–3212. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2015.62.3488.
Igor Kiss. Modrá kniha České onkologické společnosti. Doporučení pro léčbu hematologických toxicit. Vydání 30., Brno 2024, Masarykův onkologický ústav. [online]. Dostupné z: https: //www.linkos.cz/lekar-a-multidisciplinarni-tym/personalizovana-onkologie/modra-kniha-cos/aktualni-vydani-modre-knihy/#blueBookContent.
Aapro M, Boccia R, Leonard R et al. Refining the role of pegfilgrastim (a long-acting G-CSF) for prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia: consensus guidance recommendations. Support Care Cancer 2017; 25 (11): 3295–3304. doi: 10.1007/s00520-017-3842-1.
Adamo V, Antonuzzo L, Danova M et al. Supportive therapies in the prevention of chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia and appropriate use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors: a Delphi consensus statement. Support Care Cancer 2022; 30: 9877–9888. doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-07430-7.
Lyman GH, Dale DC, Culakova E et al. The impact of the granulocyte colony-stimulating factor on chemotherapy dose intensity and cancer survival: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Annals of Oncology 2013; 24 (10): 2475–2484. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdt226.
von Minckwitz G, Schwenkglenks M, Skacel T et al. Febrile neutropenia and related complications in breast cancer patients receiving pegfilgrastim primary prophylaxis versus current practice neutropaenia management: results from an integrated analysis. Eur J Cancer 2009; 45 (4): 608–617. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.11.021.
Kurbacher CM, Fietz T, Trarbach T et al. Prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia with lipegfilgrastim in patients with breast cancer: results from an interim analysis of the non-interventional study NADIR. ESMOcongress 2016 Oct 7−11; 1457P. [online]. Available from: https: //www.annalsofoncology.org/article/S0923-7534 (19) 45075-8/fulltext.
Pichler P, Claes N, Mazza P et al. Use of lipegfilgrastim in clinical practice for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia: interim results of a pan-european non-interventional study. Annals of Oncology 2016; 27 (suppl 6): abstract 1459P.

Labels

Paediatric clinical oncology Surgery Clinical oncology

Editorial

Sborník abstrakt

Jmenný rejstřík

Predictors of maintaining motivation to exercise in women with breast cancer – preliminary results of a qualitative study

Article was published in

Clinical Oncology

2024 Issue Sborník abstrakt

Download issue PDF